Old School Ad. Ruger vs SW
- Thread starter Kevin J.
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
There's nothing inherently wrong with investment castings such as the high quality castings made by Ruger. A prime difference is that since castings have no grain they need to be thicker for equal strength to a forging. Ruger has been riding that pony for years without telling the entire truth. Investment casting does have advantages otherwise as well...but that's not the point of those ads.
There's good castings and poor castings...there's good forgings and poor forgings.
There's good castings and poor castings...there's good forgings and poor forgings.
fishwishin
Member
I remember that specific ad by S&W back then. Clearly Ruger got under the skin of the S&W execs- good ol' American capitalism fun!
muddocktor
Member
I find the S&W ad to be immensely funny!
Both companies made/make excellent products right here in America. It's a difficult industry, given the high cost of skilled labor, anti-gun legislation, spurious lawsuits and bad press. Just look at how many gunmakers have changed hands over the years.
Having said that, I find people and businesses who disparage their competition distasteful and tacky. Have a little class... Talk yourself up, don't talk others down.
Having said that, I find people and businesses who disparage their competition distasteful and tacky. Have a little class... Talk yourself up, don't talk others down.
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
That disgusts me...You don't have a handle on politics, do you?
I won't comment further, because I don't want Danno to ding me!
Zipped!!
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
It was a joke…hence the emoji.
I get it..
Even though you appear to be my archrival ( note my avitar and your username), you don't disgust me. I was referring to the people who employ those tactics.
Norton 750
Member
Ha ha! As soon as I read the headline I knew what the ad was. So, was it an effective ad or not? I remembered it thirty years later...some ad executive would have to be proud of that!
RobertJ.
Member
Same here!
Inland7-45
Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2021
- Messages
- 488
- Reaction score
- 651
I remember this add very well. I have a lot of respect for Ruger. They did a great job with there first products. The Standard Auto, Blackhawks and Six Sixes are still going strong and for a good reason.
The Security Six was a great start in the DA revolver market. The design was promoted as being easily adapted to modern production methods that Ruger has always made good use of.
The Security Six was a great start in the DA revolver market. The design was promoted as being easily adapted to modern production methods that Ruger has always made good use of.
I'm at least a little bit qualified to comment on (some) Rugers, having had a collection of all the 3 screw single actions----and some more qualified to comment on S&W's, having had a collection of all the (real) target guns (from the beginning to the end of the 5 screws (and the four autoloaders I deemed relevant)---along with several target grade guns from the same period.
The Rugers were well designed and well built guns---aside from the fact the larger fame guns were a bit on the clunky side.
The S&W's were quite simply works of art---every one.
Ralph Tremaine
The Rugers were well designed and well built guns---aside from the fact the larger fame guns were a bit on the clunky side.
The S&W's were quite simply works of art---every one.
Ralph Tremaine
Last edited:
Ah yes, the ad war. My cousin, who is a big Ruger fan, is the person that got me into hand gunning by letting me shoot his Ruger Security Six .357 Magnum. I soon decided that I wanted to purchase my own, and I ended up with a 6" barrel M28-2. Not too long afterward, the S&W "Ruger burger" ad came out, and when my cousin saw it, he was not so amused.
We kidded each other back and forth about our gun choices, and I decided to up the level the next time we went to the range. When he wasn't looking, I tuck a few of those little ketchup packets you get at the fast food places, into his range bag.
After I dropped him home from the range, when I got home there was a message on my answering machine... my cousin found the ketchup packets and was cussing me out. I got a big laugh, and that wasn't the only time that the ketchup packets made an appearance in his range bag.
We kidded each other back and forth about our gun choices, and I decided to up the level the next time we went to the range. When he wasn't looking, I tuck a few of those little ketchup packets you get at the fast food places, into his range bag.
After I dropped him home from the range, when I got home there was a message on my answering machine... my cousin found the ketchup packets and was cussing me out. I got a big laugh, and that wasn't the only time that the ketchup packets made an appearance in his range bag.
Last edited:
All I read was "Meooooowwww!"
Really, I have both brands and have no issues with either one. I finally got a Security Six from the first year (Thanks Roy) 1972 since I have a couple Pre-model numbered S&Ws and some newer. I never saw a Sec. Six in real life, but it's like TJ Watt & JJ Watt compared with the GP100. But, neither have any curb appeal; they just work. The S&Ws have some class. They both spin the same direction & both just work.
Really, I have both brands and have no issues with either one. I finally got a Security Six from the first year (Thanks Roy) 1972 since I have a couple Pre-model numbered S&Ws and some newer. I never saw a Sec. Six in real life, but it's like TJ Watt & JJ Watt compared with the GP100. But, neither have any curb appeal; they just work. The S&Ws have some class. They both spin the same direction & both just work.
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
One thing that gives Ruger revolvers their strength is the one-piece, no side plate design. The thicker metal is that way to give the investment casting equal strength with the forging of the Smith and like makes. Combine the thicker steel and no side plate design and you have a strong revolver. The forged Smith is strong with a side plate.
Two different design and manufacturing technologies and philosophies that accomplish the same thing…strong, durable revolvers.
Two different design and manufacturing technologies and philosophies that accomplish the same thing…strong, durable revolvers.
Thanks for the chuckles, OP. Some of the follow-ups are also chuckle-worthy. Too bad that most of today's advertising doesn't have the humor of the past. I remember enjoying a well-crafted ad. They actually caught my attention.
Volkswagen used to tickle my sense of humor. I always enjoyed the Clydesdale ads. Any of you PNW folks remember Rainier Beer commercials? For example the guy on a motorcycle with the sound effects of: Rayyyyyy Neeeeeerrrrr Beeeeeeerrrrr.... as he headed off into the distance. Or the frogs croaking rain-ear, rain-ear.
Lots of today's ads play on people's insecurities. If they were more humorous I'd have less use for the mute button.
Back to the original topic: I have both S&Ws and Rugers in my stable. Ruger can't compare to a slicked up 586 or a Model 24. By the same token, S&W doesn't even know how to spell No.1.
Volkswagen used to tickle my sense of humor. I always enjoyed the Clydesdale ads. Any of you PNW folks remember Rainier Beer commercials? For example the guy on a motorcycle with the sound effects of: Rayyyyyy Neeeeeerrrrr Beeeeeeerrrrr.... as he headed off into the distance. Or the frogs croaking rain-ear, rain-ear.
Lots of today's ads play on people's insecurities. If they were more humorous I'd have less use for the mute button.
Back to the original topic: I have both S&Ws and Rugers in my stable. Ruger can't compare to a slicked up 586 or a Model 24. By the same token, S&W doesn't even know how to spell No.1.
Last edited:
Yendor357
Member
I have a 3 inch GP100 in 44 Special because the 696s had developed the Hilary Hole, and I would have none of that nonsense. After a Bowen rear sight, and Wolf springs, the chunky GP100 is a good gun. It's a Clydesdale. Smiths are Thoroughbreds.
Do you remember when Armalite and Springfield Armory were going at it? Springfield proclaimed to be giving you a bunch of upgrades at no extra charge. In response, Armalite said if you buy one of their rifles, they would give you a $10 toaster. It was hilarious!
I still have the toaster…..
Do you remember when Armalite and Springfield Armory were going at it? Springfield proclaimed to be giving you a bunch of upgrades at no extra charge. In response, Armalite said if you buy one of their rifles, they would give you a $10 toaster. It was hilarious!
I still have the toaster…..
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
- Messages
- 2,297
- Reaction score
- 2,483
I recall a tale of Ruger's rep demonstrating a Security-6 for a PD, or LE-officials. Something about throwing one down a stretch of asphalt, then picking it up to fire (or perhaps just dry-fire?) all six. Me thinks that odds are not in favor of a typical S&W hammer spur surviving such without getting bent.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Messages
- 19,872
- Reaction score
- 31,885
I used to get a good laugh while reading those ads in the gun rags. Back then, I do believe that what the S&W ad said was pretty true in that Ruger's had to be overly bulky and heavy to make up for the weaker cast parts and frame. Today, S&W is using cast parts as well - but as time went on they improved the process.
IMHO, over the past few decades, Ruger's manufacturing and QC has gone way up while S&W's has dropped like a rock. While I have never been a Ruger fan, they do make a bunch of guns now that are very worthy of looking at. A few friends recently purchased a few Ruger LCP Max's and a few of the Mark 4's. I have to say that with the exception of the trigger pulls on the 22's that suck, the pistols themselves are very well executed! Now that the S&W Company has moved to TN, let's hope they get their act together! For them to not realize there is a MAJOR problem is impossible! Like I have stated many times, quality comes from the top down.
IMHO, over the past few decades, Ruger's manufacturing and QC has gone way up while S&W's has dropped like a rock. While I have never been a Ruger fan, they do make a bunch of guns now that are very worthy of looking at. A few friends recently purchased a few Ruger LCP Max's and a few of the Mark 4's. I have to say that with the exception of the trigger pulls on the 22's that suck, the pistols themselves are very well executed! Now that the S&W Company has moved to TN, let's hope they get their act together! For them to not realize there is a MAJOR problem is impossible! Like I have stated many times, quality comes from the top down.
Last edited:
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
One of the best ads ever...simple and gets the point across...
This is a mock ad done very well but also gets the point across...
I was 14yrs old when I got into handguns heavy. 1st quality revolver was a Ruger Single-6. When I got big bore bug went Ruger SBH. About same time I got a NIB K22. This made me want S&W 29-27-ect. At the time early 60s the price of a Ruger BH was much less than S&W and about 1/2 Colt
SAA price. That's why I ended up with one of each Ruger BHs. When I got Security-Six it wasn't in same class as a S&W 19. Didn't keep it long. Last new Ruger DA revolver I bought was a GP, same deal- not a S&W. I liked my old Ruger SAs, but gave up on them with the New Model.
The only thing holding me back of going all S&W when teenager was money. Later I dabbled in Colts, owning all the popular models. I liked the
Python & Diamondbacks but the S&Ws edged them out. The only regrets I have about getting rid of the old Rugers and Colts is money, not as favorite
shooters.
SAA price. That's why I ended up with one of each Ruger BHs. When I got Security-Six it wasn't in same class as a S&W 19. Didn't keep it long. Last new Ruger DA revolver I bought was a GP, same deal- not a S&W. I liked my old Ruger SAs, but gave up on them with the New Model.
The only thing holding me back of going all S&W when teenager was money. Later I dabbled in Colts, owning all the popular models. I liked the
Python & Diamondbacks but the S&Ws edged them out. The only regrets I have about getting rid of the old Rugers and Colts is money, not as favorite
shooters.
gnappi
Member
I find the S&W ad to be immensely funny!
Same here, AND it put a stop to Ruger's foolishness. More than one student of mine made comments about it.
As it is, the Ruger Redhawk IS an immensely strong revolver. I owned a RH in .44 mag and 629 (IIRC no dash) at the same time and the truth be told there WERE some barn burners I'd shoot in the RH that I'd not shoot in the 629.
PS. I shot the RH to where an old oak tree at anything beyond 40 yards or so was safe! I loaded so hot I even dented the transfer bar from the firing pin whacking it back into the cupped face of the hammer!
So does STRONGER REALLY matter? Maybe... that is if you wanna shoot the gun till it's no longer serviceable. Today my 629-4 is sufficient for my needs.
Walter Rego
Member
I remember those ad wars well. And every time I saw the Smith & Wesson ad it made me hungry. I got Ruger's point. But the L frame was and is a better gun. At least up until certain changes were made that I won't mention. I own a no dash Model 586 and it is an outstanding piece of machinery.
I had long kicked myself for selling an early Dan Wesson Model 15-2VH .357 that just seemed to hit whatever I pointed it at without concentrating much upon the basics of marksmanship. The first time I fired my 586 it was the same kind of experience. S&W got it right with the L frames.
I had long kicked myself for selling an early Dan Wesson Model 15-2VH .357 that just seemed to hit whatever I pointed it at without concentrating much upon the basics of marksmanship. The first time I fired my 586 it was the same kind of experience. S&W got it right with the L frames.
I was born about 4 years before Sturm Ruger came into being, and I have always felt a connection with Ruger as being a relatively new American designed firearm with William B Ruger at the helm. Ruger soon developed a more complete line of handguns and the Single-six and Blackhawk single action revolvers really appealed to me. I don't think one is necessarily better than the other, I like them both.
Classics! Also Kingdome vendors Bill the Beerman and Rick the Peanut Man chasing the wild Rainiers. Still memorable ads 40 years later - plus lots of others on Youtube, uncovered at the Washington State Historical Society.
Check out the Northwest's greatest ads as you've never seen them before. - YouTube
Todd
Added: Back to the topic, I've always appreciated the styling of the S&W over the Ruger revolvers but they are a good product and they do have their own following.
Last edited:
I have always wondered about the factual basis to the claim that Rugers need to be thicker than S&Ws due to investment cast parts.
The Ruger Six series, and the Smith K frames, are very close in size and weight. They both fit in the same holsters, and except with wadcutters, can use the same speed loaders. So the additional bulk has to be, at the most, very minimal. One of my PPC revolvers is built up on a Ruger Police Service Six. That is a fixed sight revolver, so the top strap appears, without measuring, to be the same or closely similar to the fixed sight Smith K frame top strap. I have seen it written that the heavier top strap on the adjustable sight Rugers is to allow for the placement/protection of the adjustable rear sight assembly.
So, given the above, I would expect the Ruger Six series to be as robust as the K frame, but no more than that given the size/weight similarity. But history has proven the Ruger Six series to be far more robust than the K frames, not just equal.
I have seen this issue discussed countless times, but this apparent contradiction has never been addressed.
If anyone has some specific documented factual information, other than opinion or hearsay, I would be most interested.
I don't have a dog in this fight. I own both Smiths and Rugers. In my opinion, but often debated, the Smith L frame is an ideal revolver. I consider it to be the best .357 Smith has ever manufactured. It is my favorite Smith.
The Ruger Six series, and the Smith K frames, are very close in size and weight. They both fit in the same holsters, and except with wadcutters, can use the same speed loaders. So the additional bulk has to be, at the most, very minimal. One of my PPC revolvers is built up on a Ruger Police Service Six. That is a fixed sight revolver, so the top strap appears, without measuring, to be the same or closely similar to the fixed sight Smith K frame top strap. I have seen it written that the heavier top strap on the adjustable sight Rugers is to allow for the placement/protection of the adjustable rear sight assembly.
So, given the above, I would expect the Ruger Six series to be as robust as the K frame, but no more than that given the size/weight similarity. But history has proven the Ruger Six series to be far more robust than the K frames, not just equal.
I have seen this issue discussed countless times, but this apparent contradiction has never been addressed.
If anyone has some specific documented factual information, other than opinion or hearsay, I would be most interested.
I don't have a dog in this fight. I own both Smiths and Rugers. In my opinion, but often debated, the Smith L frame is an ideal revolver. I consider it to be the best .357 Smith has ever manufactured. It is my favorite Smith.
SnidelyWhiplash
Member
Given equal quality…an investment casting needs to be thicker as it has no grain and tends to be porous compared to a forging. Where the thickness may be similar…it's the solid, no side plate frame that gives added strength.
Also…a forging can stretch with use…which can be measured. An investment casting doesn't stretch…it fractures when overstressed or has a possible bubble in the casting.
I'm not disparaging investment castings in any way. Ruger does it to a very refined level. Also…I hear of no one disparaging Freedom Arms revolvers which have investment cast frames.
As said before…two different methods of accomplishing the same thing.
Also…a forging can stretch with use…which can be measured. An investment casting doesn't stretch…it fractures when overstressed or has a possible bubble in the casting.
I'm not disparaging investment castings in any way. Ruger does it to a very refined level. Also…I hear of no one disparaging Freedom Arms revolvers which have investment cast frames.
As said before…two different methods of accomplishing the same thing.
Reminds me of AMC cars......
...if you bought one you got a portable TV. I had to run out and buy one because I needed a TV.
To stay on topic. Ruger Security Six = DGG*
* Darn Good Gun.
...if you bought one you got a portable TV. I had to run out and buy one because I needed a TV.
To stay on topic. Ruger Security Six = DGG*
* Darn Good Gun.
RMFnLA
Member
Years ago one of the gun tags, I think Guns & Ammo, did a blow-up contest with a Model 29 and a Super Blackhawk.
The Ruger let go first.
The Ruger let go first.
Similar threads
